There have been blanket statements about such a dress being "disrespectful," even in the face of posters discussing how these dresses were approved by the clergyperson at the church they were married in. Comments about how you, personally, couldn't wear one because you were raised that way are not really the problem, IMO.

It's not rude to have an opinion as long as you express it politely. Saying, "I find wearing strapless dresses in a house of worship disrespectful" is not rude. We are allowed to have opinions and express them even when those opinions aren't popular. I haven't seen a post where someone said anything like, "anyone who wears a strapless gown might as well sew a scarlet letter onto it." That would be rude.

I went back and read the posts of the minority.

One said they found strapless in a church tacky and another said they agreed with that person and believe a covering should be worn with the dress during the church ceremony.

I don't find either of those statements to be judgemental of the individuals but of a style.

It is rather naive to believe that criticizing a style says nothing of the person who chooses that style.

This. Especially with a word like disrespectful. If you say it's ugly, well, that's just your aesthetics. But "disrespectful" is an attempt to analyze the motives and feelings of the person wearing the style.

The only use of "disrespectful" (other than people saying people said it was disrespectful) was one poster who said "it seems disrespectful to me."

We had a thread recently about asking "What?" when you didn't hear someone clearly and some had the opinion that it seemed disrespectful to use What. I didn't hear anyone claim that they felt they were being called out as being disprectful if they said they used the word.

Is this some how different? I'm not being contrary, I'm really curious. We have lots of threads where people have vastly different opinions. Is this one different because it someone felt the poster was implying the dress wearer was disrespectful to their church? Or is it an emtional tie to your wedding?

There have been blanket statements about such a dress being "disrespectful," even in the face of posters discussing how these dresses were approved by the clergyperson at the church they were married in. Comments about how you, personally, couldn't wear one because you were raised that way are not really the problem, IMO.

It's not rude to have an opinion as long as you express it politely. Saying, "I find wearing strapless dresses in a house of worship disrespectful" is not rude. We are allowed to have opinions and express them even when those opinions aren't popular. I haven't seen a post where someone said anything like, "anyone who wears a strapless gown might as well sew a scarlet letter onto it." That would be rude.

I agree that it's not rude to hold or express an unpopular opinion in a polite manner. I also agree that most comments in this thread have been very polite (some have been borderline on both sides). However, when an opinion is unpopular or puzzling to others, you are probably going to be asked to clarify. A couple of posters stated that they think brides in strapless gowns are being disrespectful if the ceremony is of a religious nature. They have been asked to clarify if they meant that as a rule across the board, no exceptions, or if they thought bare shoulders would be still be disrespectful (and to whom) if the bride inquires beforehand and is assured that the church has no such restriction or guideline. The "and to whom" part is most important to me in my understanding of this belief because I do not believe that disrespect can exist in a vacuum - there has to be a disrespected party.

I really am puzzled by this belief and I want to understand it, especially because I have been characterized as disrespectful and I don't know why. That's an ugly thing to be accused of.

I would be happy to clarify for you, but I don't happen to agree with that particular opinion. And I'd be pretty hypocritical if I did. Though my dress had a high Victorian collar and sleeves, it was pretty risque in other ways. I was really only responding to the idea that expressing an opinion that others don't like is rude.

There have been blanket statements about such a dress being "disrespectful," even in the face of posters discussing how these dresses were approved by the clergyperson at the church they were married in. Comments about how you, personally, couldn't wear one because you were raised that way are not really the problem, IMO.

It's not rude to have an opinion as long as you express it politely. Saying, "I find wearing strapless dresses in a house of worship disrespectful" is not rude. We are allowed to have opinions and express them even when those opinions aren't popular. I haven't seen a post where someone said anything like, "anyone who wears a strapless gown might as well sew a scarlet letter onto it." That would be rude.

I agree that it's not rude to hold or express an unpopular opinion in a polite manner. I also agree that most comments in this thread have been very polite (some have been borderline on both sides). However, when an opinion is unpopular or puzzling to others, you are probably going to be asked to clarify. A couple of posters stated that they think brides in strapless gowns are being disrespectful if the ceremony is of a religious nature. They have been asked to clarify if they meant that as a rule across the board, no exceptions, or if they thought bare shoulders would be still be disrespectful (and to whom) if the bride inquires beforehand and is assured that the church has no such restriction or guideline. The "and to whom" part is most important to me in my understanding of this belief because I do not believe that disrespect can exist in a vacuum - there has to be a disrespected party.

I really am puzzled by this belief and I want to understand it, especially because I have been characterized as disrespectful and I don't know why. That's an ugly thing to be accused of.

I would be happy to clarify for you, but I don't happen to agree with that particular opinion. And I'd be pretty hypocritical if I did. Though my dress had a high Victorian collar and sleeves, it was pretty risque in other ways. I was really only responding to the idea that expressing an opinion that others don't like is rude.

Well, in that case we are in agreement, depending, of course, on how the dissenting opinion is expressed

For the record, my actual wedding dress was a Renaissance-style dress; it showed a bit of cleavage, but nothing extreme, and had full sleeves. But it wasn't a traditional wedding dress in the modern sense - it was in shades of green with gold-colored trim. So was I disrespectful for choosing a "nontraditional" style and color? Even though green is associated with fertility, the Earth, and lots of other positive things by many Wiccans and other pagans?

If my current plans hold, I'll be getting married in a dress that has full sleeves...and is dark purple!

There have been blanket statements about such a dress being "disrespectful," even in the face of posters discussing how these dresses were approved by the clergyperson at the church they were married in. Comments about how you, personally, couldn't wear one because you were raised that way are not really the problem, IMO.

It's not rude to have an opinion as long as you express it politely. Saying, "I find wearing strapless dresses in a house of worship disrespectful" is not rude. We are allowed to have opinions and express them even when those opinions aren't popular. I haven't seen a post where someone said anything like, "anyone who wears a strapless gown might as well sew a scarlet letter onto it." That would be rude.

I went back and read the posts of the minority.

One said they found strapless in a church tacky and another said they agreed with that person and believe a covering should be worn with the dress during the church ceremony.

I don't find either of those statements to be judgemental of the individuals but of a style.

It is rather naive to believe that criticizing a style says nothing of the person who chooses that style.

This. Especially with a word like disrespectful. If you say it's ugly, well, that's just your aesthetics. But "disrespectful" is an attempt to analyze the motives and feelings of the person wearing the style.

The only use of "disrespectful" (other than people saying people said it was disrespectful) was one poster who said "it seems disrespectful to me."

We had a thread recently about asking "What?" when you didn't hear someone clearly and some had the opinion that it seemed disrespectful to use What. I didn't hear anyone claim that they felt they were being called out as being disprectful if they said they used the word.

Is this some how different? I'm not being contrary, I'm really curious. We have lots of threads where people have vastly different opinions. Is this one different because it someone felt the poster was implying the dress wearer was disrespectful to their church? Or is it an emtional tie to your wedding?

Overall, I think strapless gowns in churches are tacky. For an outdoor wedding or another venue, sure if that's what the bride wants. I agree with the idea that if you wouldn't wear a tube top to church, why would you wear something that amounts to the same (lack of) coverage to what is arguably the most important religious ceremony of your life? It seems direspectful to me.

I also find strapless dresses completely boring anymore. It seems like everyone wears the same fit & flair/mermaid strapless dresses anymore, the only differences being details like lace or beading. Brides have become very cookie cutter in the last few years. I'd rather see a bride dressed like Duchess Catherine; at least she looked appropriate, pretty and respectful (regardless of whether you like her personally or not). Or a different color; wedding gowns do not have to be white...that's simply a fashion trend that no one is required to stick to. But these dull, white strapless gowns are just overdone.

Overall, I think strapless gowns in churches are tacky. For an outdoor wedding or another venue, sure if that's what the bride wants. I agree with the idea that if you wouldn't wear a tube top to church, why would you wear something that amounts to the same (lack of) coverage to what is arguably the most important religious ceremony of your life? It seems direspectful to me.

I also find strapless dresses completely boring anymore. It seems like everyone wears the same fit & flair/mermaid strapless dresses anymore, the only differences being details like lace or beading. Brides have become very cookie cutter in the last few years. I'd rather see a bride dressed like Duchess Catherine; at least she looked appropriate, pretty and respectful (regardless of whether you like her personally or not). Or a different color; wedding gowns do not have to be white...that's simply a fashion trend that no one is required to stick to. But these dull, white strapless gowns are just overdone.

It's very... odd to me to claim that a tube top is the same as a strapless gown. It's like comparing a maxi dress beach coverup to a long evening gown. Each are appropriate in their own intended contexts, but they're not at all comparable in any way other than the amount of skin they cover.

Regarding the "disrespectful" discussion, I believe that another poster said that she thought that in order for there to be disrespect, there must be someone to be disrespected. I agree with this completely.

What if someone's religion expressly believed that the MOST respectful attire was to be "skyclad".Would someone of that belief who participated in their wedding ceremony skyclad be disrespectful just because the prevailing majority opinion is that it is disrespectful to get married in the buff? I would say absolutely not. While that is an extreme example, I think that it can be scaled down to the discussion at hand. Brides on this thread have stated that they asked their clergy if strapless dresses were appropriate and they were told they were. So who is being disrespected?

(I love the term "skyclad", by the way. Is it specific to ceremonial situations or am I allowed to refer to my preschooler - whose favorite state is nude - as skyclad?)

Logged

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

It's very... odd to me to claim that a tube top is the same as a strapless gown. It's like comparing a maxi dress beach coverup to a long evening gown. Each are appropriate in their own intended contexts, but they're not at all comparable in any way other than the amount of skin they cover.

Totally agree with this.

Logged

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

I have to agree there is some palpable hate for strapless dresses going on in some posts. And a lot of assumptions - it really does come across in this thread as though getting married in a church is the way people get married and not merely a way. I have been to more ceremonies not in churches then in churches, so to me the assumption of church alone is a pretty big leap. My ceremony was under the open sky, as was my BBF's and my brother's, and a few other friend's. Several weddings I've been to have been in catering halls, one was in a family home, another in a restaurant. And certainly countless people get married at City or Town Hall (and not just standing before a clerk, in a nice private room, with dozens of guests and flowers and dressed up). One of my friend's was married in a casino in Vegas and the ceremony live streamed over the internet.

All of these weddings were taken seriously. And in fact of all the people I know who have divorced (my generation or prior generations) they have only been people who had church weddings. All the secular weddings (and true enough plenty of church weddings) have resulted in lasting unions. So really tying the idea of taking the importance of the occasion and tying it to churches and the dress code for some churches is in of itself disrespectful. Attending and getting married in a church doesn't mean someone is any more serious then someone who does not, nor does the shape or color of a dress bespeak to the solemness of the occasion. I got married in full on red. Because it was beautiful and to me, wearing a color I felt beautiful in wasn't about vanity but about honoring the occasion and my husband. And thats also why I wore strapless. I had my dress custom made - I could have had any style. But to me, and on me, strapless is elegant, and timeless and flattering.

Many strapless dresses are much more covered up then plenty of sleeved or strap dresses:

I have to agree there is some palpable hate for strapless dresses going on in some posts. And a lot of assumptions - it really does come across in this thread as though getting married in a church is the way people get married and not merely a way.

I think experience could really skew those assumptions, too. For some a clean shaven man is a disgrace. I certainly wouldn't apply that standard to everyone or expect them to accpet it as a universal truth.

I have to agree there is some palpable hate for strapless dresses going on in some posts. And a lot of assumptions - it really does come across in this thread as though getting married in a church is the way people get married and not merely a way.

Overall, I think strapless gowns in churches are tacky. For an outdoor wedding or another venue, sure if that's what the bride wants. I agree with the idea that if you wouldn't wear a tube top to church, why would you wear something that amounts to the same (lack of) coverage to what is arguably the most important religious ceremony of your life? It seems direspectful to me.

I also find strapless dresses completely boring anymore. It seems like everyone wears the same fit & flair/mermaid strapless dresses anymore, the only differences being details like lace or beading. Brides have become very cookie cutter in the last few years. I'd rather see a bride dressed like Duchess Catherine; at least she looked appropriate, pretty and respectful (regardless of whether you like her personally or not). Or a different color; wedding gowns do not have to be white...that's simply a fashion trend that no one is required to stick to. But these dull, white strapless gowns are just overdone.

Would a well fitting tube top made of thicker material with a corset on top be acceptable then? I don't think it would.

I think that if one choose to wear a strapless dress, they should wear some kind of cover while in church.

I don't see how any of those statements are offensive.

It really feel like any kind of disagreement with the majority in this thread is not going to be received well.

I think where it causes offence is calling what numerous people in the thread have described as their own experience as being"tacky" and "disrespectful". Particularly when no rationale is given. It's possible to express disagreement without insulting the people you disagree with.

(My own personal view is that there is nothing inherently wrong with wearing a strapless gown. I also believe that there are situations where it *would * be inappropriate, but I think they are situational - if you're marrying in a church / synagogue / denomination where the norm is for more "modest" clothing, for instance.

I would be very interested in hearing (from those who feel strapless gowns are not appropriate) as to why they feel this way? SitohCat said that brides "should" cover up in church, and SamiHami I think said something similar - why, specifically? I'm genuinely curious as to why you feel that way. (I understand SamiHami's view that strapless dresses are 'same-y' and overdone - I don't entirely agree, but I understand! - to me, that might be a reason to chose something different, if you want a dress which is more distinctive, but I don't see having a generic dress as being tacky or disrespectful or inappropriate.

Strapless dresses and tube tops are not for me. They look ridiculous on me, given the way I am built. And they are not comfortable either- again, given my body type.

But I am not going to flame somebody for wearing one. It is not my body, my wedding, or my business.

On the other hand, I do wish bridal companies would make more styles with sleeves. I am a modest person who does not feel comfortable showing that much skin- especially on my wedding day, when all eyes will be on me. If I were just another guest at a banquet or ball, I may wear something with thick straps or sleeveless- although I would still bring a shawl. But to MY own wedding, I will need at least cap sleeves, back coverage (I need support given the way I am cut), AND a shawl. On such an important day, I need to look good and be comfortable- all other factors will be making me nervous enough.